Marc A. Fournier

Objective and Background How do targets shape consensus in impression formation? Targets are known to play an outsized role in the accuracy of first impressions, but their influence on consensus has been difficult to study. With the help of the recently developed extended Social Relations Model, we explore the structure and correlates of individual differences in consensus (i.e., dissensus). Method Across 3 studies, 187 photographs of targets were rated by 960 perceivers on personality and evaluative traits, as well as being coded for physical cues by trained coders. We explored the within‐target consistency of consensus across traits, as well as its relationship to four categories of theoretically relevant correlates: expressiveness, normativity, positivity, and social categories. Results The tendency to make a consistent impression on others was broadly consistent across traits. High‐consensus targets tended to be more expressive, had more normative physical cues, and were viewed more positively. Conclusions At least in a first impression context, targets may play a unique role in predicting the consensus of personality judgments by providing perceivers with more information to work with, and making a negative impression on others may carry social costs.

We investigated whether intelligence, creativity, meaning-making, and the Big-Five traits are necessary conditions for wisdom. We used Amazon’s TurkPrime to recruit 298 participants who ranged from 20 to 73 years of age. Participants completed measures of intelligence, creativity, meaning-making, and the Big-Five traits, along with a battery of self-report and performance wisdom measures. We used principal component analyses to reduce the wisdom battery into self-report and performance wisdom components, followed by necessary condition analysis and segmented regressions to examine whether the cognitive and personality variables under consideration here were necessary conditions for each wisdom component. We found that intelligence was necessary for the performance wisdom component whereas the Big-Five traits were necessary for the self-report wisdom component. This study is the first to demonstrate that high levels of wisdom are unlikely without some level of intelligence and adaptive personality traits.